Apparently, this guy was British.

No, he held a British passport, which was supposedly issued 3 weeks ago. The identity in the British passport was fake, and he's actually from Sri Lanka.

I truly believe that for every increased "security" provision, we are giving up a civil liberty which will never be restored. Security will not be reduced to a lower level over time. We are being reduced to a nation who will choose security over freedom, and end up with neither.

If the published stuff is correct, he was taken asked for questioning the day before, and not allowed to fly.

Sources in France said the man attempted to board an American Airlines flight to Miami on Friday but was pulled aside by Charles de Gaulle Airport authorities in Paris, who said he did not answer all their questions.

So in some way Profiling does work, this guy was singled out for some reason. But

The man was turned over to French National Police, sources said, who believed his British passport was genuine and allowed American Airlines to reissue his ticket for Flight 63 the following day when he missed his first plane.

So he somehow satisfied their questions and was allowed to go on.


[This message has been edited by cordelli (edited 12-23-2001).]

i wonder if randy will start selling FlyerTalk flip-flops to wear through security? i wonder if our kids will know them as security sandals instead of shower sandals.

For all of you people that think all will be well when we get some "better security staff", think about this.

This guy was turned over to the French National Police - who for the sake of discussion are 'professionals'. And guess what, even with all this personal attention, they still let him fly.

So what good is all this scanning, probing, disrobing and de-clipping worth?

One point that has not made the discussion so far... the last line of defense in all security is the flight crew and passengers. And in that regard, the system worked.

Never again will any of us sit quietly as the safety of a flight is threatened. As QL once said here, the real weapon of terrorists was our own hesitation, and that has been neutralized.

Yes, so right and that is why Sept 11 will not happen again. Vs. the millions and millions of $$$ and lost jobs, etc. that we are doing instead. So sorry.

You know, I'm not sure what's up now. They said that the guy may have been trying to light a cigarette now. I've read that they sent dogs to sniff his shoes, and they found no explosives in them.

So what is the real deal with this situation?

Before we jump to conclusions, we need to know that.

According to CNN, the FAA has just announced our new punishment: random shoe checks.

And on the local all-news station here in LA, they're warning people to allow 3 hrs. for domestic & 4 hrs. for international trips.

"Shoes checks will be done"...was the quote at the end of the story.

The pictures on the 6PM TV news tonight showed ridiculously long lines.

With regard to the scanning device that sees through clothes. It does not use Xrays. I don't have time right now to pull the source info. The military also has some very experimental versions that look like binoculars so that people approaching a checkpoint with a handgrenade in their clothes would be spotted before they get to close. It does let you see the human body but not the same as a nude portrait. I am very sure that many people will be very uncomfortable with this technology. Also I am very unsure that this would have caught the explosives in his shoe. First the machine mainly spots variations in densities, but is only sees through relatively light substances. Therefore the shoes outer layer may have come across as normal. I am also unsure that exraying would necessarily caught explosives in shoes. The xray is going to show various consistencies/cavities in a shoe, which with the wide variety of padding etc in some sneakers and shoes, might mean nothing.

I would say that this is a case of someone not associated with a real terrorist cell. From the little we know so far, I would say that someone with very little knowledge of demolitions came up with this stunt. I have only heard that he had detcord and something of C4 consistentcy in the shoe. The det cord by itself would not have set off the explosive if it was C4/semtex style. If this had been planned by Al Qaida or any other major group he would have had something that did not rely on trying to light the explosive with a match. Someone that wanted a simple system with the minimum of metal would use an elctrical detonation system with a PDA as the something that looks like earphones to connect to the shoe.

Again profiling is the best thing that can be done but that is not full proof. It is possible that the reason this person was passed by the french police is because he could not be linked to a terror cell and that would help account for the very amature nature of his explosive. He probably has weak links through mosques with banned groups, but again a terrorist group is not going to want to waste a chance by not having a high probability of success.



------------------
Robert

Duplicate post

[This message has been edited by robvberg (edited 12-24-2001).]

Brian,

Then shouldn't we get a rebate of our "security fee" that is tacked on some itineraries now?

Imagine if the FAA was in charge of interstate highway safety...

Picture fleets of trucks loaded with stop signs, etc. and dumptrucks filled with asphalt positioned strategically at major highway interchanges, where the workers would sit around drinking coffee, reading newspapers, etc. while monitoring their radios (kind of like a fire station).

Every once in a while, they'd get a report of a major accident... this would be followed by a mad scramble to their trucks and a race to the scene (with lights flashing and sirens blaring).

Upon arrival, they would immediately shut down the relevant section of the highway while they installed speed bumps, flashing warning lights/messages, and then at the precise location of impact, gigantic stop signs!!

On each side of the road, they would build small booths which would house police who would be stationed there around the clock with radar guns at the ready (one pointed at each traffic lane). A 1/4 mile on either side of this dangerous location, we would have National Guardsmen standing watch-- they wouldn't actually be trained or empowered to do anything particularly relevant, but they would show that the government was on the case.

After spending all this money and keeping the highway shut for, say, a day or two... all the FAA officials would congratulate each other on another problem solved-- there won't be any more fatalities on this section of road!!

[This message has been edited by HKG_Flyer1 (edited 12-24-2001).]